Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naked Happy Girls


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. I have not created the redirect as there's a split consensus of redirect/delete. That said, it's an editorial decision that this close does not preclude. Star  Mississippi  02:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Naked Happy Girls

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Prod contested with suggestion to redirect/merge, but I see no point in doing so as there is too little verifiable content worth keeping. This doesn't seem to be a notable show, as I found absolutely nothing of worth in a WP:BEFORE. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Sexuality and gender. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:52, 22 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete - insufficient notability. Not the worst article out there in terms of coverage, sometimes there is nothing...in this case I did find one source in the Daily Telegraph, but the coverage is only a brief mention and so not substantial. There is also a book but as the author is linked to the TV program, it's not independent. Newswire coverage here also too brief to be considered significant and not independent, same with |A173122243&v=2.1&it=r&sid=ebsco this which is a press release. There are quite a few minor hits around the internet, but mostly brief mentions, appearances in TV guides etc, but nothing substantial enough to meet notability. I think any potential expansion would be relying on primary sources being the show itself and/or original research due to the lack of coverage and sourcing. MaxnaCarta (talk) 01:05, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Hard to find much of anything that isn't, um, "for a discerning audience" when googling this one. I really tried, sincerely. Oaktree b (talk) 01:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:16, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Delete or redirect and, if redirect, to what target? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of Playboy videos Playboy TV as preferred WP:ATD. Naked Happy Girls is already mentioned there and nothing in WP:R applies. ~Kvng (talk) 13:39, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete does not have significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that is needed for WP:GNG. Not convinced of the need for a redirect as its only a namecheck, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Kvng and WP:CHEAP ;;  Maddy  ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ ::  talk   10:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * @Maddy from Celeste, you !voted to redirect "per Kvng". Kvng has updated his preferred redirect target. Is Playboy TV the best target, in your view? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:35, 1 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree it should be redirected to Playboy TV. ;;  Maddy  ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ ::  talk   09:05, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect, though I think Playboy TV is the better target., I'd appreciate knowing if there's a reason to prefer List of Playboy videos, as the section that mentions the show is saying the show's run was later released on home video. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I guess Playboy TV would be better since it was there first ~Kvng (talk) 14:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete No redirect. Absent this non-notable show, "naked happy girls" is too generic to justify this. Zaathras (talk) 00:41, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG. No redirect needed, it's not clear that the title should even be mentioned at the suggested page, since the list there appears to be little more than a random sample. Avilich (talk) 02:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.